[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13383?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17186558#comment-17186558
]
Aleksey Plekhanov commented on IGNITE-13383:
--------------------------------------------
[~zstan], I see no race here. Handshake should always be synchronous from a
clients point of view (client should not send the next message until receiving
handshake response), so it's just impossible to pass condition {{connCtx ==
null}} twice for one session.
If the client implementation is not correct and can send the next message
before receiving handshake response, there will be problems even with
synchronization, since message processing order is not guaranteed, and regular
message can be processed by server before handshake request.
Do I miss something?
> Java thin client improvements: channel reconnect and redundant concurrency
> structures replacement.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-13383
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13383
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: thin client
> Affects Versions: 2.8.1
> Reporter: Stanilovsky Evgeny
> Assignee: Stanilovsky Evgeny
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> I found that {code:java}ConcurrentHashMap{code} and
> {code:java}AtomicLong{code} are redundant in java thin client code, yes i fix
> tests a bit but i can`t see any contradictions with thick client behavior
> here.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
